Originally Posted by Falls City Beer
When does life begin? When does the fetus stop being a glob of cells and become a living entity, with rights?
When does life begin? When does the fetus stop being a glob of cells and become a living entity, with rights?
We'll go down in history as the first society that wouldn't save itself because it wasn't cost effective ~ Kurt Vonnegut
And here we go!
We'll burn that bridge when we get to it.
Isn't that the only question that matters here?
We'll go down in history as the first society that wouldn't save itself because it wasn't cost effective ~ Kurt Vonnegut
You don't have to. In fact, I somewhat agree with you.
If it came down to the life of a woman or the fetus ... I'd save the woman. She has established relationships, is someones wife, mother, sister, daughter, etc. IMO, the women is more important than the fetus in that case.
I don't know how to say it so that it doesn't sound condescending, but it does make me sad that all life, or what will become life, or what will possibly become life at some point - isn't held in higher esteem.
No, no one has yet addressed my question, which seems much more specifically related to this matter: Where do you draw the line between the reckless endangerment of a fetus, and a mother-to-be simply going on about her life, albeit without much thought for her actions?
Clump of cells v. human life isn't the issue here...how much responsibility a potential mother has to the well-being of her unborn child IS. Introducing the "clump of cells" argument only serves to cloud the true issue.
We'll burn that bridge when we get to it.
I don't really see anyone holding anyone's life in lower esteem--I see practical issues arising out of a very difficult question.
We'll burn that bridge when we get to it.
When the child can survive independent of the mother's womb. Before then it's a fetus.
But registerthis is right, this issue of a mother's culpability is different--I led the discussion astray, unintentionally, but I did.
Last edited by Falls City Beer; 08-19-2005 at 07:18 PM.
“And when finally they sense that some position cannot be sustained, they do not re-examine their ideas. Instead, they simply change the subject.” Jamie Galbraith
Not to obturate the intimation you are injuncting, but I did register the article. I simply have a different elucidation apropos the idea of exculpating this woman, which I think is convivial to the extent of merriment.
Now let's try the same sentence with a Germanic, as opposed to a Latinate, lexicon:
I don't want to call your words crap, but I got the point. I think the woman is a b***** and drinks and makes lusty too much.
“And when finally they sense that some position cannot be sustained, they do not re-examine their ideas. Instead, they simply change the subject.” Jamie Galbraith
Well, the evolution thread has run its course several times, and still keeps ticking. I'd really be interested in the RedsZoners' take on this question, although I know it's incendiary.
I'm not looking for a referendum on abortion, but the question of where does life begin is one that has been debated since the dawn of time, and could make for an interesting discussion, if everyone plays nice.
We'll go down in history as the first society that wouldn't save itself because it wasn't cost effective ~ Kurt Vonnegut
First off CE, I wanted to mention that I've found your opinions very informative and well considered on numerous subjects. I've really enjoyed reading your recent posts (and learning from them as well). I'm not sure this particular issue is as slippery a slope as you perceive though. There's a tremendous difference between abusing an illegal substance, and not taking one's prenatal vitamins, for instance. One thing is clearly against the laws of the United States, physically detrimental, and has scientifically been documented to seriously harm developing fetuses, whereas the other would likely have pretty minimal impact in my opinion.
I think there should be some consideration given to the amount of potential harm the action could cause. Again, there is a tremendous difference between throwing down Jack Daniels vs not exercising enough. I think, in lawsuits like this, there should be a reasonableness type assumption - as in "would a reasonable person consider this relatively safe behavior during a pregnancy?" As for childen suing their parents, I would think by the time they could intellectually realize their parent was doing something detrimental during pregnancy, the statute of limitations for a civil suit would have expired.
I do completely agree with you that it's nearly impossible to effectively quantify how something affects a fetus's development, unless it's something knowingly harmful (drinking excessively, drug abuse, etc). For instance, how does vegetarianism affect a developing fetus? Is that potentially harmful? A glass of wine once per month? How do supplements affect a developing fetus? All of these are very intriguing questions.
I do agree, however, with the basis of this lawsuit in the sense that the woman knowingly engaged in what I consider reckless and derelict behavior during a pregnancy. It has been shown in numerous studies how dangerous drug use is during pregnancy, and it's common knowledge that pregnant women should abstain from drinking and drug usage. While I agree that you can't litigate based on "slippery slope" issues such as caffeine usage, or diet, or other factors that might negatively affect a pregnancy, I think this was pretty flagrant behavior on her part.
JMO. Please keep posting on these topics - I'm really enjoying reading your perspective.
I believe that life begins at conception. If we classify the tiniest of bacteria and amoeba as life forms, then so too must you classify as the fertilized zygote a lifeform. The zygote contains all 46 human chromosomes that a person will carry for the remainder of their life. At seven weeks, the heart is pumping blood through the tiny fetus. This is the fetuses blood, not the blood of the mother. Sure, the fetus can't yet survive outside the womb, but that shouldn't make it any less a classification for it being a living being.
My dad got to enjoy 3 Reds World Championships by the time he was my age. So far, I've only gotten to enjoy one. Step it up Redlegs!
A bacterium is a self-sustaining organism; an embryo dies outside of the mother.
“And when finally they sense that some position cannot be sustained, they do not re-examine their ideas. Instead, they simply change the subject.” Jamie Galbraith
mold is a lifeform, but it needs moisture to survive.
My dad got to enjoy 3 Reds World Championships by the time he was my age. So far, I've only gotten to enjoy one. Step it up Redlegs!
Yeah, and you and I need oxygen. What's your point? We, like mold and bacteria, can move around to obtain what we need. An embryo is unsustainable and is wholly dependent on the body of a woman.
“And when finally they sense that some position cannot be sustained, they do not re-examine their ideas. Instead, they simply change the subject.” Jamie Galbraith
Posting Permissions
|
Board Moderators may, at their discretion and judgment, delete and/or edit any messages that violate any of the following guidelines: 1. Explicit references to alleged illegal or unlawful acts. 2. Graphic sexual descriptions. 3. Racial or ethnic slurs. 4. Use of edgy language (including masked profanity). 5. Direct personal attacks, flames, fights, trolling, baiting, name-calling, general nuisance, excessive player criticism or anything along those lines. 6. Posting spam. 7. Each person may have only one user account. It is fine to be critical here - that's what this board is for. But let's not beat a subject or a player to death, please. |
Reply With Quote